Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-31 Thread Ian Jackson
Dale Scheetz writes (Re: New virtual package names. ): ... Well, I'm pretty sure that Bill didn't just wake up one morning and say Wow! That essential field sure is neat! Let's put it in ae! My assumption was that this was an attempt to keep ae in the system. I think that Bill was under

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-30 Thread Dale Scheetz
On 30 Aug 1996, Mark Eichin wrote: Emacs also has conditions where it calls an outside editor... Interesting. I'm aware of cases where it will call outside *viewers* (mostly mime/web stuff) but I can't think of what outside editors it would call. Could you perhaps expand on this

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-28 Thread Dale Scheetz
On 27 Aug 1996, Rob Browning wrote: Dale Scheetz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: (Until they try to remove all editors) I don't want to cause trouble, but why don't we just completely disallow the removal of ae. It's harmless, and the entire package only takes up 54K. I can't see that it's

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-27 Thread Ian Jackson
Dale Scheetz writes (Re: New virtual package names. ): ... Part of my concerns stem from the past history of ae. I have only recently taken over the maintainance of this package. When I got it, the essential field had been declaired a bug, but the discussion of that bug seemed to indicate

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-27 Thread Lars Wirzenius
Ian Jackson: What terrible thing do you think will happen if the user removes all their editors ? They'll sit there wanting to edit a file and think Damn, I can't figure out why I can't edit this file. I just sit here blankly and wonder how I used to edit files. ? Yes. -- Please read

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-27 Thread Dale Scheetz
On Tue, 27 Aug 1996, Ian Jackson wrote: Dale Scheetz writes (Re: New virtual package names. ): ... Part of my concerns stem from the past history of ae. I have only recently taken over the maintainance of this package. When I got it, the essential field had been declaired a bug

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-26 Thread Dale Scheetz
On Sun, 25 Aug 1996, Ian Jackson wrote: I have read all of the discussion. Just because I'm a week behind on my email doesn't mean I'm not reading it. However, since you seemed so insistent, I went back and had a look at what arguments people might have presented. I found a rather

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-23 Thread Dale Scheetz
On Wed, 21 Aug 1996, Ian Jackson wrote: Dale Scheetz writes (Re: New virtual package names. ): On Fri, 9 Aug 1996, Ian Jackson wrote: ... Noone is going to deinstall all the editors on their system and not notice what they've done wrong and how to fix it - this is not the kind

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-22 Thread Ian Jackson
Dale Scheetz writes (Re: New virtual package names. ): On Fri, 9 Aug 1996, Ian Jackson wrote: ... Noone is going to deinstall all the editors on their system and not notice what they've done wrong and how to fix it - this is not the kind of `mistake' our dependency scheme should try

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-14 Thread Dale Scheetz
On Fri, 9 Aug 1996, Ian Jackson wrote: Dale Scheetz writes (Re: New virtual package names. ): ... On another note, is there an editor virtual package? Is there any interest in adding one? It could be valuable to add Provides: editor to ae (and others as well). Sorry I'm coming

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-10 Thread Ian Jackson
Dale Scheetz writes (Re: New virtual package names. ): ... On another note, is there an editor virtual package? Is there any interest in adding one? It could be valuable to add Provides: editor to ae (and others as well). Sorry I'm coming into this so late (just over a week, in fact), but I

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-02 Thread Warwick HARVEY
Well, it's been a while, so lets add: imap-client and imap-server to the virtual package names list. Sure thing. I'm not familiar with imap though, so could you give me a description for these to go in the list? On another note, is there an editor virtual package? Is there any interest in

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-02 Thread Lars Wirzenius
Warwick HARVEY: Are there packages that depend on having an editor, Without trying, I think of vipw, vigr, mail, elm, rcs (and thus cvs), trn, tin, and nn. I grant that all but vipw and vigr can be used without an editor -- if you only read mail and news and never check anything in. I don't

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-02 Thread Dale Scheetz
On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Warwick HARVEY wrote: On another note, is there an editor virtual package? Is there any interest in adding one? It could be valuable to add Provides: editor to ae (and others as well). What would it be used for? Are there packages that depend on having an editor, or

Re: New virtual package names.

1996-08-01 Thread Dale Scheetz
Well, it's been a while, so lets add: imap-client and imap-server to the virtual package names list. On another note, is there an editor virtual package? Is there any interest in adding one? It could be valuable to add Provides: editor to ae (and others as well). Thanks, Dwarf